/minutes-lint

Run a consistency check across all meetings to find decision conflicts and stale commitments.

How to run the lint

1. Run the consistency check:

   minutes consistency --stale-after-days 14

Optional filters:

• --owner <name> — limit to commitments assigned to a specific person
• --stale-after-days <N> — change the staleness threshold (default: 7)

1. Parse the JSON output and present it as readable markdown.

Formatting the report

Decision Conflicts

For each conflict, show:

**Topic: {topic}**
- Latest: "{latest decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- Prior: "{prior decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- **Status**: These decisions may contradict each other.

Frontmatter v2: resolved supersessions. When the resolution field is present on a conflict, the newer decision has a supersedes: entry in its frontmatter. Treat this as informational, not a red flag. Format as:

**Topic: {topic}** ✓ Resolved
- Current: "{latest decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- Superseded: "{prior decision text}" — *{meeting title}* ({date})
- **Status**: {resolution text}

If the latest decision also carries an authority field (high/medium/low), surface it next to the title. Authority is optional — when absent, omit the tag.

Stale Commitments

For each stale item, show:

- [ ] **@{who}**: {task} (due {due_date}, {age_days} days overdue)
  - Last discussed: *{meeting title}* ({date})

Clean bill of health

If no conflicts and no stale commitments, say: "No decision conflicts or stale commitments found across your meetings. Everything looks consistent."

When to suggest next steps

• If there are decision conflicts: suggest running /minutes-debrief on the most recent conflicting meeting, or /minutes-search "{topic}" to review the full decision history
• If there are stale commitments: suggest the user update the action item status in the meeting file, or bring it up in the next meeting with that person
• If the user wants to dig deeper into a specific person's commitments: suggest minutes commitments --person "{name}"

Gotchas

• The consistency check uses graph.db — if it seems stale, suggest minutes people --rebuild to refresh the index
• Stale != forgotten — some action items are intentionally deferred. Don't alarm the user; present the data and let them decide
• Decision conflicts are topic-based — two meetings discussing "pricing" with different conclusions will flag, even if the later decision intentionally superseded the earlier one. Context matters.